Sal Restivo

The 1990s could be called The Decade of Sociology in mathematics education. It was during those years that the sociology of mathematics became a core ingredient of discourse in mathematics education and the philosophy of mathematics and mathematics education. Unresolved questions and uncertainties have emerged out of this discourse that hinge on the key concept of social construction. More generally, what is at issue is the very idea of “the social”. Within the framework of the general problem of “the social”, we want to open a discussion of boundaries and margins in mathematics and mathematics education. By theorizing the divisions of purity and danger, we will be able to better understand the intersection of logic, mathematics, and thinking with gender, race, and class, and morals, ethics, and values in the classroom. The process of transforming the sociology of mathematics and the sociology of mind into pedagogical tools for mathematics educators and philosophers of education has already begun. One of the tasks before us is the development of a more profound and at the same time more practical grasp of “the social”. Our objective in this paper is to move ourselves and our readers in the direction of just such a grasp of the social.

An international group of distinguished scholars brings a variety of resources to bear on the major issues in the study and teaching of mathematics, and on the problem of understanding mathematics as a cultural and social phenomenon. All are guided by the notion that our understanding of mathematical knowledge must be grounded in and reflect the realities of mathematical practice. Chapters on the philosophy of mathematics illustrate the growing influence of a pragmatic view in a field traditionally dominated by platonic perspectives. In a section on mathematics, politics, and pedagogy, the emphasis is on politics and values in mathematics education. Issues addressed include gender and mathematics, applied mathematics and social concerns, and the reflective and dialogical nature of mathematical knowledge. The concluding section deals with the history and sociology of mathematics, and with mathematics and social change. Contributors include Philip J. Davis, Helga Jungwirth, Nel Noddings, Yehuda Rav, Michael D. Resnik, Ole Skovsmose, and Thomas Tymoczko

Objectivity revisited and revised -- The social theory of objectivity and its problems -- Sociology : a Copernican revolution changes how we think about science and mathematics -- Science studies : sociological theory and social criticism -- Math studies and the anarchist agenda -- Anarchism and modern science -- What's mind got to do with it? -- Science, religion, and anarchism : the end of God and the beginning of inquiry -- A manifesto in anarcho-sociology -- Appendix. A dialogue on the syllogism with philosopher Jean Paul van Bendegem (JP), Free University of Brussels.

Open peer commentary on the target article “Who Conceives of Society?” by Ernst von Glasersfeld. Excerpt: Von Glasersfeld claims that socialization arises from drives, interests, purposes, and inclinations . These are all functions of intelligence, and none of these is a social phenomenon. The concept of society, he claims, “has to be formed by each individual by means of generalization from his or her own experiences” . This sort of methodological individualism views the individual as a natural kind and society as an artificial construction. In the wake of the new sociology of science, which has demonstrated the dangers of trying to distinguish immutable facts from our descriptions of the world, methodological individualism is doubly problematic. It violates the fundamental perspective that drives sociology, and it ignores the empirical results of the new sociology of science

Humanist sociologists are activists rooted in the reality of history and change and guided by a concern for the 'real life' problems of equality, peace, and social justice. They view people as active shapers of social life, capable of creating societies in which everyone's potential can unfold. Alfred McClung Lee introduces this volume with 'Sociology: Humanist and Scientific' and develops the theme that a sociology that is humanist is also scientific. The other nine selections are grouped into four parts: 'The Individual and Social Life;' 'Social Institutions: Technology, Science, and Formal Organization;' 'Political Structures: Issues of Justice and Equality;' and 'Methodological Critiques and Counterproposals.'

This book offers a unique analysis of how ideas about science and technology in the public and scientific imaginations (in particular about maths, logic, the gene, the brain, god, and robots) perpetuate the false reality that values and politics are separate from scientific knowledge and its applications. These ideas are reinforced by cultural myths about free will and individualism. Restivo makes a compelling case for a synchronistic approach in the study of these notoriously 'hard' cases, arguing that their significance reaches far beyond the realms of science and technology, and that their sociological and political ramifications are of paramount importance in our global society. This innovative work deals with perennial problems in the social sciences, philosophy, and the history of science and religion, and will be of special interest to professionals in these fields, as well as scholars of science and technology studies.

This book reviews the research on Einstein’s brain from a sociological perspective and in the context of the social brain paradigm. Instead of “Einstein, the genius of geniuses” standing on the shoulders of giants, Restivo proposes a concept of Einstein the social being standing on the shoulders of social networks. Rather than challenging Einstein’s uniqueness or the uniqueness of his achievements, the book grounds Einstein and his achievements in a social ecology opposed to the myths of the “I,” individualism, and the very idea of “genius.” “Einstein” is defined by the particular configuration of social networks that he engaged as his life unfolded, not by biological inheritances.

This book advances the "strong" programme that sociology and anthropology provide a scientific foundation for arguing that God and the gods are human creations. Contending that religion is one - but not the only - way to systematize and institutionalize the moral order of a society, the author argues that religion reflects the fundamental human need for belonging and the social function of compassion. As such, our transcendental and supernatural ideas are really concerned with our everyday lives in communities and, faced with the severity and immediacy of the global problems with which the world is confronted - existential threats - it is increasingly important to abandon delusions and correct our mistake in reference, not by eradicating religion, but by grounding it more explicitly in earthly matters of community, social solidarity, belonging, and compassion. A wide-ranging study of the roots, nature, and purpose of religion and theistic belief, Society and the Death of God will appeal to sociologists, social theorists, and philosophers with interests in the scientific study of religion and the role of religion in the life of humankind.